Biosolids.

Biosolids are nutrient-rich organic materials that result from processing domestic sewage in a treatment facility.  When treated and processed, these residuals can be recycled and applied as fertilizer to improve and maintain productive soils and stimulate plant growth.

Under federal law, there are different rules for different classes of biosolids.  While both classes are treated, class A biosolids contain no detectable levels of pathogens, but class B biosolids may contain trace amounts of pathogens.  Both class A and class B biosolids are subject to buffer requirements: they may not be applied within a certain distance of waters of the state, at minimum 100 feet depending on the field slope of the application site.  Class A biosolids are subject to neither crop-harvesting nor public access restrictions.  Class B biosolids are subject to crop-harvesting and public access restrictions. 

Biosolids Management Program.

The Department of Ecology (Ecology) administers a biosolids management program (Program).  Rules for the Program address how and when biosolids can be applied to land as a fertilizer.  These rules include other requirements of biosolids, including total pollution concentration limits, pathogen reduction rates, and vector attraction reduction requirements.

Ecology charges fees to the regulated entities who need permits under the program.  The fees recover Ecology’s costs of processing permits, monitoring compliance with the permits, and providing technical assistance.  The regulated entities are wastewater treatment plants and other facilities that actively manage biosolids, meaning they treat, sell, or give away biosolids, or directly apply biosolids to land.  These plants and facilities include publicly owned treatment works, privately owned treatment works that treat only domestic sewage or treat domestic sewage separately from industrial wastewater, septic tank sludge management facilities, and facilities that compost biosolids.

Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Chemicals.

Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) chemicals are a class of fluorinated organic chemicals that contain at least one fully fluorinated carbon atom.  The PFAS chemicals are characterized by their resistance to oil, stains, grease, and water, as well as their durability, heat resistance, and anticorrosive properties.  They are added to carpets, cookware, food packaging, clothing, cosmetics, and other common consumer products.  The PFAS chemicals are also included in certain types of firefighting foams.

State Developments.

Ecology identifies PFAS chemicals as persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic.  In November 2024, Ecology and the Washington State Department of Health released a statewide funding strategy and a set of recommendations for addressing PFAS chemicals in drinking water, managing environmental contamination, reducing PFAS chemicals in products, and understanding and managing PFAS in waste.  Washington has enacted laws and adopted regulations relating to PFAS chemicals levels in drinking water, firefighting foam and equipment, food packaging, and many consumer products.

Federal Developments.

In 2021 the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced its PFAS Strategic Roadmap, laying out the EPA's approach to addressing PFAS chemicals.  As part of the roadmap work, in January 2025, the EPA released a draft risk assessment for two PFAS compounds, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluoroctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), in biosolids.  The EPA's draft risk assessment indicates there are potential risks to human health for those living on or near properties where there is land application of sewage sludge (septage), containing PFOA and PFOS.  These risks are variable depending on chemical concentration, chemical management practice, and local and geological conditions.

In 2024 the EPA designated PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances and set maximum contamination limits, which are legally enforceable levels, for these PFAS chemicals in drinking water.

In December 2024 the EPA released method 1633A, which is EPA's recommended method for analyzing PFAS chemicals in aqueous, solid, biosolids, and tissue samples.  The method examines 40 PFAS chemical compounds in biosolids.

By September 30, 2028, Ecology must convene an advisory committee with representatives from the farming community, toxicologists, utilities that produce soil amendments, local governments, experts, interested parties, and other similar stakeholders.  Utilities that produce soil amendments include special purpose districts, municipal utility providers, and public utility districts.

By July 1, 2026, Ecology must publish guidance to clarify PFAS chemicals sampling requirements for facilities generating biosolids.  These facilities must sample for PFAS chemicals no more than quarterly, starting no later than January 1, 2027, and ending by June 30, 2028, and then must provide all results to Ecology by September 30, 2028.  The facilities must have the biosolids samples analyzed by an accredited laboratory that uses the current EPA method for PFAS chemicals sampling.

By July 1, 2029, Ecology must submit a report to the Legislature and the public with a summary of the analysis of the levels of PFAS chemicals in biosolids produced in and/or land applied in the state and recommendations on how to proceed based on the analysis.  Ecology must consult with the advisory committee when developing this report.

For the purposes of Ecology establishing PFAS chemicals sampling or testing requirements and reporting recommendations, biosolids do not include septage.

The fees that Ecology may charge to recover Ecology's costs for the biosolids management program may additionally be established in amounts to recover sampling or testing costs.

(In support) There should be knowledge of the levels of PFAS chemicals, also known as forever chemicals, that are applied to land, specifically on farm and forestlands.  This bill will establish a baseline for acceptable levels of PFAS chemicals applied to the land.  The bill  doesn't negatively impact soil enrichments.  There is hope that this bill will fill an information gap and show that biosolids in Washington are not as contaminated as in other parts of the country where there is a great amount of concern.  The state should catch up with the federal government and this makes that connection and updates an existing program that provides protection.  The general permit that governs biosolids that is administered by Ecology doesn't account for the fact that there are PFAS chemicals in biosolids.  So PFAS chemicals are being spread and there is no system to test, monitor, or regulate the dangerous substance.  PFAS chemicals cause cancer and other harms to humans and wildlife.  There is uncertainty and risk with the state allowing this in places where food is grown and where it could impact drinking water.  There is a strong interest in protecting drinking water and lands we depend on for food.  A number of sewer and water districts have experienced contamination due to historic use of biosolids.  Water and sewer districts also need a safe and effective way to dispose of biosolids.  Eighty-five percent of biosolids are beneficially used, making the beneficial use essential.  Biosolids are applied to a very small percent of land in the state.  There has been work on this issue with Ecology for 20 years.  The application of biosolids is contaminating surface water.  There was a lawsuit in 2022 and documents from that can explain the concerns.  There is no reason for delaying this until 2028; a quicker timeline is preferred because that is a long time to wait.  There is a desire for the bill to be stronger.  Biosolids should not be described as being of beneficial use when they contain PFAS chemicals.  This bill was a grassroots effort, and this is the third year it has been introduced.

(Opposed) None. 

(Other) Ecology's permits regulate nine pollutants in biosolids and PFAS chemicals are not one of them.  This bill will provide the state with data to help science-based policy decisions.  The timelines in the bill do not adequately address the urgency of the situation and should be shortened.  The bill could also be strengthened by removing or modifying the beneficial use language, and by including public health, environmental, and climate smart agriculture representatives in the advisory committee.

(In support) It is time that we look at what is in the many tons of biosolids that we have been putting on agricultural land for years.  The bill would increase existing fees paid by wastewater treatment plants.  There is voluntary testing happening now, but not very much.  Right now we don't know how much PFAS is being spread on our farms and forests, and this bill will help us understand the extent of the problem. 

(Opposed) None.

(Other) Four years for a report is too long.  Communities around the country have already banned the spread of PFAS and sewage waste.  PFAS is highly toxic and is being used to grow our food.  The advisory committee members will be too friendly with PFAS industries. 

(In support) Senator Jeff Wilson, prime sponsor; Heather Trim, Zero Waste Washington; Wyatt Golding, The Nisqually Delta Association; Scott Hazlegrove, WA Association of Sewer and Water Districts; Joren Clowers, Sno-King Water District Coalition; Kyle Dorsey, The Coalition for Clean Water; Ann Murphy, League of Women Voters of Washington; and Bob Guenther, citizen.